43 C.F.R. § 4.1150
Who may file
Any person charged with a civil penalty may file a petition for review of a proposed assessment of that penalty with DCHD, 801 North Quincy Street, Arlington, Va. 22203.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5
cases, 1982–1982 · leading case: B & M Coal Corp. v. Off. of Surface Mining Reclamation & Enf't, 531 F. Supp. 677 (S.D. Ind. 1982).
B & M Coal Corp. v. Off. of Surface Mining Reclamation & Enf't, 531 F. Supp. 677 (S.D. Ind. 1982). “18 and 43 C.F.R. § 4.1150 . However, in contravention of 30 U.”
John Walters Coal Co. v. Watt, 553 F. Supp. 838 (E.D. Ky. 1982). “On January 27, 1981, the plaintiff filed petitions for administrative review of the three proposed penalty assessments, pursuant to 43 CFR § 4.1150 et seq. However, the plaintiff did not forward payment of the amount of proposed penalties as required by 30 U.”
United States v. Crooksville Coal Co., Inc., 560 F. Supp. 141 (S.D. Ohio 1982). “, and 43 C.F.R. § 4.1150 et seq. reveals that these procedures comport with the procedural due process requirements of the Fifth Amendment.”
United States v. Hill, 533 F. Supp. 810 (E.D. Tenn. 1982). “18 ; 43 C.F.R. §§ 4.1150 et seq. A full, adversarial, evidentiary hearing is held, as under remedy III described above.”
United States v. Log Mountain Mining Co., 550 F. Supp. 811 (E.D. Tenn. 1982). “18 ; 43 C.F.R. §§ 4.1150 et seq. A full, adversarial, evidentiary hearing is held, as under remedy III described above.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.